...as an aside, a potentially moving article by a Zen priest who was a spiritual advisor to a man on death row in Arkansas. I found this while browsing on Buddhist themes and it reminded me of another discussion (link).
It's at http://www.engaged-zen.org/articles/Kobuts...w_Practice.html
But I don't mean this to be a Buddhist-themed discussion; more of a "criminal-justice-themed" discussion.
To quote from the same site: The Engaged Zen Foundation "is inexorably committed to the abolition of punitive incarceration in any form, the dismantling of the prison industrial complex, and the adoption of alternative, restorative, methods of dealing with what is colloquially known as “criminal justice.”"
That might make interesting food for thought... or heated discussion...
Full Version: Death row practice
QUOTE(Achintya @ Jul 08, 2007, 02:34 PM) 
The Engaged Zen Foundation "is inexorably committed to the abolition of punitive incarceration in any form
I'm sure psycho- and sociopaths around the world support this too!
Indeed they would. Or perhaps they wouldn't. I can imagine Hannibal Lecter judging that *-paths (other than himself, or perhaps even including himself) ought to be locked up. He had some ostensibly high-handed cultural and sociological philosophies.
I am probably opening myself up to a lot of flak here, but I tend to support that agenda from the EZF. Obviously (at least, I would hope that it's obvious) they're not in favour of allowing these people to kill, or rape (or nailbomb, or nervegas, or whatever) again, and they would favour strict precautions to preclude these possibilities.
I think their argument would go something like this: criminals are humans, and they suffer. Despite their past acts, they are deserving of compassion. (Also, compassionate attitudes are more likely to dissuade them from future crimes). Locking them up or executing them is not compassionate but brutal. It would seem to be more ethical to avoid incarcerating them, and instead to try and heal them.
At present it is almost certainly not practicable, but I think they have a good idea in principle. If it could be implemented, I think it would be beneficial.
I am probably opening myself up to a lot of flak here, but I tend to support that agenda from the EZF. Obviously (at least, I would hope that it's obvious) they're not in favour of allowing these people to kill, or rape (or nailbomb, or nervegas, or whatever) again, and they would favour strict precautions to preclude these possibilities.
I think their argument would go something like this: criminals are humans, and they suffer. Despite their past acts, they are deserving of compassion. (Also, compassionate attitudes are more likely to dissuade them from future crimes). Locking them up or executing them is not compassionate but brutal. It would seem to be more ethical to avoid incarcerating them, and instead to try and heal them.
At present it is almost certainly not practicable, but I think they have a good idea in principle. If it could be implemented, I think it would be beneficial.
QUOTE(Achintya @ Jul 09, 2007, 02:34 PM)
Obviously (at least, I would hope that it's obvious) they're not in favour of allowing these people to kill, or rape (or nailbomb, or nervegas, or whatever) again, and they would favour strict precautions to preclude these possibilities.
What are these strict precautions?QUOTE(Achintya @ Jul 09, 2007, 02:34 PM)
Despite their past acts, they are deserving of compassion. (Also, compassionate attitudes are more likely to dissuade them from future crimes).
Compassion works?:Yassin Omar was born in Somalia in January 1981 and came to the UK as a child in the early 1990s, as a refugee from the civil war.
Omar's home became the bomb factory for the conspiracy. Hundreds of litres of hydrogen peroxide were brought into the home and used to make the bombs.
Omar detonated his bomb on the Tube near Warren Street station. Eyewitnesses saw him blown off his feet by the detonator's force - but the main charge did not ignite.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6264839.stm
Get real Achintya! Or, alternatively, when these criminals are caught, have them all live in your house!
Deep breaths, Hey Hey...
We weren't actually discussing terrorism here; just the story of a reformed murderer on death row. But since you mention it...
That's a very sad story. But unfortunately, the only thing it proves is something we both accept: that terrorism is awful. (And also that it arises from people in desperate situations. In that regard, it would seem to support my suggestion that compassion (which might have made Omar's situation a little less desperate) might discourage acts of terrorism.)
To answer your suggestion: if I could spare the criminals' lives, and also dissuade them from committing any more crimes, then I probably would have them live in my house. But don't dwell unnecessarily on that; it's only my personal choice, and I think a rational exposition of the issues around this topic is of more value than debating my personal views.
~~~~
If one believes that punishing criminals is a good in itself (i.e. apart from its consequences), then one supports the idea of retributive justice. This idea emphasises payback over restitution: a criminal would be hanged even if it did no good to the victim, because it would be the "right thing to do".
Alternatively, one might support punishing criminals as a deterrent to other potential criminals (something you've hinted at supporting elsewhere) or as a means to rehabilitation or greater security. In this case you'd be a supporter of utilitarian justice.
Alternatively, one might not support punishment at all. If you believe there's no free will, for instance, that might undermine the idea that someone deserves to be punished. Or if you believe that less good would come from punishment than from other measures (e.g. just rehabilitation), then you might choose those other measures instead. Probably the perpetrator would experience some discomfort regardless, so the process wouldn't be strictly punishment-free...
If you want to discuss these issues then maybe read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice#Theor...ibutive_justice
It's quite a short section.
We weren't actually discussing terrorism here; just the story of a reformed murderer on death row. But since you mention it...
That's a very sad story. But unfortunately, the only thing it proves is something we both accept: that terrorism is awful. (And also that it arises from people in desperate situations. In that regard, it would seem to support my suggestion that compassion (which might have made Omar's situation a little less desperate) might discourage acts of terrorism.)
To answer your suggestion: if I could spare the criminals' lives, and also dissuade them from committing any more crimes, then I probably would have them live in my house. But don't dwell unnecessarily on that; it's only my personal choice, and I think a rational exposition of the issues around this topic is of more value than debating my personal views.
~~~~
If one believes that punishing criminals is a good in itself (i.e. apart from its consequences), then one supports the idea of retributive justice. This idea emphasises payback over restitution: a criminal would be hanged even if it did no good to the victim, because it would be the "right thing to do".
Alternatively, one might support punishing criminals as a deterrent to other potential criminals (something you've hinted at supporting elsewhere) or as a means to rehabilitation or greater security. In this case you'd be a supporter of utilitarian justice.
Alternatively, one might not support punishment at all. If you believe there's no free will, for instance, that might undermine the idea that someone deserves to be punished. Or if you believe that less good would come from punishment than from other measures (e.g. just rehabilitation), then you might choose those other measures instead. Probably the perpetrator would experience some discomfort regardless, so the process wouldn't be strictly punishment-free...
If you want to discuss these issues then maybe read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice#Theor...ibutive_justice
It's quite a short section.
It's OK, I've already read Wikipaedia 
. I get all of my best jokes from there. Obviously you do too, Teach!
. I get all of my best jokes from there. Obviously you do too, Teach!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.